I'm confused here.  Are you talking to me?  Because if you are, I think you believe I don't think tagging bounty cheaters is a good idea--it is.  I'm referring to the mass-tagging of all bounty hunters simply because they participate in bounties.

I was agreeing with your post, so I don't know where the miscommunication is.

I think I've been guilty of this, but generally I don't reply to a shitpost unless it's to blast it for being idiotic or if there's actually something in it that's coherent and I want to respond to.  Everybody's got their own notion of what constitutes a shitpost, but some of them are so generic and cookie-cutter that nobody could reply to them even if they wanted to.  And sweet jeezus, going through a section like Bitcoin Discussion to report crapola posts is maddening.  I've done it, and it takes a toll on you.

Not for nothing, but tagging as many bounty hunters as humanly possible was essentially what actmyname (whatever happened to him) and I were doing just prior to the merit system being introduced, as a way to discourage shitposting.  You'll remember at the time that there weren't any effective tools for cleaning up the forum, so the trust system was all we had. 

Theymos has already given his opinion on how negative trust should be handed out, and I don't think he'd approve of gang-tagging bounty hunters indiscriminately.  Granted, I'd be more than happy to join in on such a tagging party, but 1) it goes against the guidance Theymos has given, and 2) as you said, it would probably be ineffective.  It might be a little bit effective, but I seriously doubt it would discourage many of these hardcore bounty participants, and it'd just be a pain in the ass for whoever decided to do the tagging.

Then there's that.  And it all comes down to how the trust system should be used.  You really shouldn't just give negative trust to a bounty hunter simply because that's what they're doing on the forum.  I get that they're spammers (not just on bitcointalk, as you pointed out), but red trust should be reserved for truly untrustworthy members.

Lol.  Governments are kinda known for doing that--mine, yours, and probably all across the globe and throughout time for that matter.

So let me get this straight.  Nigeria is introducing a CBDC and ditching physical currency altogether?  Are they the first country to do this?  I don't really follow crypto news or global news for that matter, so I have no idea if anyone has actually done this yet.

Charles-Tim already posted this quote, but I have no idea what it means:


What about things like bank and debit cards?  Are those going to be replaced by this CBDC?  I'm not sure if that question sounds simpleminded or not, but I never considered how implementation of a CBDC would play out.  Now that I think about it, a country's currency would have to be either their new digital currency or their old one, physical or not.  They couldn't really exist side-to-side, could they?

Those are good points you brought up, and the role of government and the things it should and shouldn't do is (and always has been) a very complex discussion.

However, one point you didn't bring up is cruelty to animals, which many governments have laws against.  If you ask me, cockfighting is animal abuse, though I'm sure there are a lot of members who'd disagree.  They're just chickens, right?  And I'm by no means a PETA activist, but I consider modern chicken farming to be a form of abuse as well (like packing them together with no room to move, pumping steroids in them such that they gain so much weight that they can't move, etc.). 

But hey, that's just me.  The government of my country doesn't seem to mind how chickens are farmed, although they regulate it.  They do have laws against cockfighting.  Not always consistent with their actions or their philosophy, are they?

Nice job sniffing that info out, and I've negged OP and his alt accounts as well.  Unfortunately, bounty abusers are like cockroaches--when you see one, there are usually many more hiding in the woodwork where you can't see them.  So I'm betting those 3 accounts aren't the only ones OP controls. 

I'm also hoping that bounty managers are still taking forum trust into account when they decide which members to accept.  I know sig campaign managers do, but I'm fairly ignorant as to what happens in the altcoin/bounty sections.

Stockpiling food isn't a bad idea for people in countries that might be the most affected by a possible food shortage (and damned if I know exactly which countries those are), but if everyone started doing that all at once it might be more of a problem.  When COVID hit, it seemed like everything was flying off the shelves--and that was before the supply chain issues hit.  I remember the cat food aisle being almost bare two years ago, so when panic buying happens it leaves a lot of people without the things they need.

Farming is a great idea, but the problem is that not everyone can do it, either because they don't have enough land or knowledge or money to invest in setting up a garden.  There are a lot of very poor people in the word, you know.  And I have a feeling that they're the ones who'll be the hardest hit if there comes a food shortage.

That's a big "if".  In the US it seems like there's plenty of food to go around, and the government is one of the ones that helps out other countries when they get hit by disasters (never mind all the horrible things they otherwise do).  But who knows?  I could be one of the people planting tomatoes and living off of salad until the world re-equilibrates.  I hope it doesn't come to that, but these days nothing is off the table as far as possibilities.

Foul words are OK, but straight up insults are acceptable?  Got it.

My question to you: Is owlcatz correct, despite the offense you took to his post?  I haven't read your scam accusation for the flag you want supported (I will), but you didn't refute his point.  If what he said is true, it makes all the difference as far as whether anyone should support the flag or not.

Edit:

Regarding your no-cursing rule added after the fact, I guess it only applies to members who don't support your case:

I haven't read that whole thread yet, but seeing as how it's from October of last year, I don't think you're going to get many people to support your flag.  You've been bumping it for a while, so if someone hasn't added their support by now they're not likely to.  Don't know if you're in the right or not, but best of luck to you.

I'm not exactly sure what your post means, but damn....I don't remember lovesmayfamilis being banned at all.  I had to check all the pages of that thread to see if I posted in it.  

I just based what I said about naim027 on the interactions we had regarding these fake USB sticks that are advertised as being able to mine XMR.  It's a long story, and I'm not arguing that he didn't lie or anything of the sort.  The more I read in this thread, the more I feel I have to remind myself more often to be wary of dealing with people here.  

Also, I agree that it isn't cool to send merits to alt accounts, so there's that.

Yep, that's the litmus test for how devoted one is to bitcointalk.  Speaking of that, how many members have gotten a signature ban instead of a permanent one?  Anyone know?

Seriously?

I don't understand what OP is trying to do here at all.  This thread is just bizarre and confusing.  Take this for example:

The part in bold just does not compute.  There's never been a need for anything OP is suggesting, and it's perplexing to me as to why a relative newcomer would propose all of this crap. 

Whew.  If you hadn't written them out, I would have had no idea which months were in each 12-month calendar year.  OP, just stop with this merit phishing.

Lol.  That lack of clarification is the reason why I didn't blast OP with both barrels--but I'm not sure what else those two words could mean in the context of the thread he created.  It sounds like SEO for shitcoins, and I don't even want to know how it's done.

I'm gonna go old school and just say word up to that, buddy.  I've never looked into the advantages of DCA investing, but I've done it with retirement accounts in the past where money was taken out of my paycheck every week. 

For the crypto market, though?  I don't think a lot of folks on this forum do it, either because they don't have the discipline or simply don't have enough money on a regular basis to plow into bitcoin or whatever altcoin they're into.  I mean just take a look at all the obviously desperate bounty hunters there are, working for shitty tokens that might be worth nothing (assuming they even receive them at the end of the bounty period).  I have a feeling they're trying to earn crypto to buy basic need items and probably aren't building a crypto stash.

With respect to this most recent crash, I'd point out that dollar-cost-averaging would only protect you if your average purchase price was less than $30k or so, and it won't always prevent you from "losing more".  You can actually lose everything depending on what you're investing in.

If by "assets" you mean cash on deposit, the FDIC insures those deposits up to a certain amount in case of a bank failure.  Coinbase isn't a bank, and their customers' coins aren't insured (unless Coinbase does it by some other means).

First of all, they've only been a public company for just over a year, and their stock started dropping almost immediately after it was issued--no doubt because investors thought there was going to be much more demand for it than there turned out to be.  I just took a look at the stats on my brokerage account, and their P/E is 6.47 right now.  That's well below the general market, but for a financial institution that's about what you'd expect.  Plus if their earnings keep dropping, that ratio is probably going to increase--and that's what I'm assuming investors are expecting.

Other than that, warning of risks in SEC filings is par for the course for any company.  Just look at the annual reports of any company you can think of that's publicly traded.  They list off all the risk factors that might put them out of business, no matter how unlikely.

OP, you're selling a sketchy service from what I can tell, so you'll get no sympathy from me--but I'll tell you that if you're getting this upset about that single idiot posting his referral link in your thread; retaliating in one of his threads; and creating a new thread to complain about moderation, this isn't the forum for you.  Thicken that skin up, because this forum is brutal.

I would also add that the post you're bitching about was made less than two days ago.  Sometimes it takes a while for mods to act.  Obviously you haven't noticed the massive amount of garbage posts all over the forum.  The moderators get deluged with reports, so you just have to be patient.

I can't either, and I'm assuming that message and the fact that a member's e-mail is revealed to the mods (if that's actually the case) is a relic of the past, meaning it might have served some function back in 2009 but is only an unwanted violation of privacy in 2022.  Not a massive violation, mind you, but your e-mail address should only be seen by forum staff who absolutely need to know it IMO.

OP, how in the world did you earn that single merit I see under your avatar?  That had to have been a fat-finger fuckup on paxmao's part, because every thread you start is as if some being from another galaxy where economics don't exist just happened to drop in on the forum and ensconced itself in the Economics section.

Needless to say, I don't even have a counterargument to present except to once again plead with you to stop starting all of these threads with your multiple alt accounts.  Either you're trolling or (much worse) you really think ideas like airdropping some stablecoin created out of thin air to everyone in the world will eradicate poverty.  Believe me, if that plan had even a remote chance of working someone in academia or government would have thought of it about 5 minutes after the creation of the first stablecoin.

I was expecting the first page to be filled with slobbering praise, but I'm pleasantly surprised to see the emperor being told he ain't wearin' no fackin' clothes almost immediately.

That's no bitcointalk logo; that's the bitcoin logo tilted and defaced with MS Paint or whatever.  Where's the "cointalk" addition to the BTC, which is what would make it scream "BITCOINTALK" instead of just confusing people?  I read your rationale for what you drew there, Cyrus, but I've never been into modern art and all the nuances baked into the art pieces that aren't obvious to the casual viewer's eyes.  A bitcointalk logo should very clearly represent what the logo stands for, IMO.

That said, I've got no art game and wouldn't even be able to improve upon that....thing.

Hmm.  That might not be a bad idea.

I tagged those three members whose profiles you linked to, OP.  To my eyes the evidence is solid enough to warrant negative trust unless or until they show up here to argue successfully to the contrary.  They look like they're all just shitty bounty hunters from the 2017 era when the ICO craze was in full effect--and also when a lot of accounts were being sold and hacked.

We'll see.

Oh wow, I had no idea there was this drama surrounding you, naim027.  I still don't really know what all the details are aside from what was written in this thread, but you did a great job sniffing out the Midas USB stick scam since I wasn't able to due to the language barrier I was up against.

Whether your ban is just or not, I happen to believe you're not here just to drop shitposts for whatever sig campaign or bounty you're in.  I'm sure that's probably a factor (as it is for most members participating in either of those), but based on the interactions I've had with you I don't think you're the type of member who needs to plagiarize material in order to post.  Whether you really did plagiarize is another story, and that's between you and the moderators now.

I do wish you luck, and if you've learned your lesson and truly haven't lied as you've been accused of doing, you've got my support.

Me neither, and if OP is as privacy-oriented as he seems to be I'd advise him to stay far away from any wallet or exchange that asks for personal information.  But it sounds like he's savvy enough not to use whatever it is that Edge is anyway.

Which is unfortunate, because it's one of my favorite wallets (despite the very true things Leo said about it).

I've seen the Bisq name before, but I never looked into what they're all about--but since you mentioned it in the context of the topic of this thread, I pulled up their website and bookmarked it for future perusal.  Thanks for that, because I have a feeling that all of these centralized, non-KYC exchanges are going to become a thing of the past, and probably sooner rather than later.  This whole Luna meltdown attracted the attention of regulators, and even if it hadn't I've been predicting the same thing for a long time now.

As far as security of my money is concerned and an exchange like Coinbase or Gemini pulling a Cryptsy, I wouldn't give it a second thought--even if their financials are poor or even undisclosed.  Both of those exchanges are regulated by the US government, so if either one were to find themselves in a position where their business model is no longer viable, they'd just shut down, but I don't think any of their customers' money would be at risk.

I haven't read much about why Coinbase had such a poor quarter, and I don't quite understand why that is.  Even if bitcoin's price declined substantially, they're basically like any other broker: they make their money through fees paid by their customers, no?  And even if trading volume nosedived, they still should be making a profit....unless their company is too bloated, meaning they have too many employees and too much overhead.  Since they don't have physical branches like most stock brokerages do, I'm not sure how big their operation needs to be.

In any case, no, an exchange's financials don't concern me one bit.